87 réponses à ce sujet

[AlanC9]

Marionetten wrote...
Most of those complaints did stem from console players. Dragon Age: Origins was more or less universally praised by PC gamers while the console gamers commented on how it looked outdated and how the silent protagonist just wasn't believable.

I just don't check you on voices. I didn't see any correlation between the poster's platform and requests for a voiced PC. I suppose we could check the thread archives.

And the other big change -- a single background -- has a long tradition in PC RPGs. Is that one also driven by console users.

The few console gamers who enjoyed Dragon Age: Origins for what it was?

Fine, but then it's not really coherent to talk about this as being a change made to benefit console users.

[Master Shiori]

Telum101 wrote...

1. Silent protaganist swapped out for voiced, 'pre-set' character: I understand that you (Bioware) probably wanted to show us the dragon age from a different perspective, but I don't see why he/she has to be so 'predefined' in comparison to our wardens. Going from a silent and diverse character who actuall, and then to Hawke, a character from a story that will be told to us doesn't exactly scream 'sequel' to me, and on that note...

I don't have an opinion on voiced protagonist vs silent one. I do, however, understand that some stories require a more predefined protagonist in order to be told. The good thing is that such a change isn't a rule for future DA games, so we could easily have a change to freely customize our characters there.

Luke Nods wrote...
2. Entirely different story: A lot of people have said that the wardens' story is finished, but the fact is, with Hawke, you're writing a new story from scratch (I'd hope so). Why not do the same with the characters we are attached to? Warden did the ultimate sacrifice? Use magic! You did it with Shepard. The point is, our wardens still have another 20 or so years(?) to do something interesting, and it would surely feel much more like a sequel if we were able to expand on the dragon age as it is, rather than rewriting it.

This is one of my biggest concerns with DA2. The story about stopping the Blight might be over, but that doesn't mean the Warden cannot enbark on brand new adventures. Considering how much people who played DA:O feel attached to their characters, I really cannot see the reason why they couldn't have one more game.
Personally, I prefer to take the same protagonist through several games. This allows me to feel like I'm building an epic story over the course of several adventures.
The other reason is that there are loose ends that concern my Warden and his romance with Morrigan and this is something I want to resolve with him rather than some new unknown pc.

Luke Nods wrote...
3. New art style: Again, going from a dark fantasy style to having Hawke doing flips around sad humans with skin diseases on the surface of the sun (ok maybe that's a tiny bit exaggerated) isn't what I'd expect in a sequel. Forgive me for being a bit offensive here, but please get rid of the person who thought spikes coming out of everyones' chests would be a good idea. It looks absolutely terrible and impractical.

I haven't seen enough of the new art style to make a solid opinion of it. So far the only thing I really don't like is the way hurlocks look in DA2. I feel they were much better in Origins and see this change as a step backwards, rather than as an improvement.

Luke Nods wrote...
That's actually all I have right now. Other features like the dialogue wheel and alleged simplified combat don't really appeal to me either, but I think those fit in with point 1.

Dialogue wheel itself is only a delivery methond for dialogue itself. It allows us to habe more dialogue option but also makes those options more vague than what we had in Origins, where you could clearly read the entire sentence and get a pretty good idea of what you're about to say.
With DA2 we might have a same problem as in ME, except here things are even more complicated since there are no clear "good, evil, neutral" choices. Hopefully, the devs will handle this problem well enough that we'll have a pretty clear idea of what exactly we're going to say.

Luke Nods wrote...
Are all these changes a decision to market to a different audience? experimenting with something new? is the game being rushed out? was DA:O not successful enough? Some official response would be much appreciated.

I don't think the reasons are as simple as "we want more sales", "we're rushing it" or "ME was better so let's make DA the same" (this last one is particularly ridiculous).
Games will always evolve and change from one title to the next, since no matter how good they were before they can always get better. Now what is considered "improvement" will depend on who you're asking. Some people loved almost everything about DA:O (myself included). Others can probably point out a dozen things they didn't like and want to see changed in the sequal.
The important thing is to never forget what made DA:O special in the first place and to not remove these things when you start implementing changes.

[Marionetten]

AlanC9 wrote...

I just don't check you on voices. I didn't see any correlation between the poster's platform and requests for a voiced PC. I suppose we could check the thread archives.

I'm talking about the forums outside of this one. We're not an accurate representation of the majority as most of us are hardcore fans. Look to something like www.gametrailers.com for a far better selection.

AlanC9 wrote...

And the other big change -- a single background -- has a long tradition in PC RPGs. Is that one also driven by console users.

I'm more inclined to believe that is driven by the need to have a voiced protagonist. So, yes.

AlanC9 wrote...

Fine, but then it's not really coherent to talk about this as being a change made to benefit console users.

Most. Not all.

Modifié par Marionetten, 26 juillet 2010 - 05:22 .

[In Exile]

McHoger wrote...

Seems to me the majority of PC Gamers derided it for not being Baldur's Gate 3.

I remember on the old forums, the major criticisms of DA:O were how the combat had been dumbed down because know we weren't told the statistics in the description for the spells (how can I know how to build my character unless you tell me fireball does 9d6 damage!), the inventory system, now relying on a scroll down menu with tabs instead of the boxes of NWN and BG was also dumbed down (and we have the option to carry how many items, 80!? absurd!) especially since there was a shared character inventory versus an individual inventory.

Let's not even speak about what a disaster the origin stories will be for roleplay, because of how much they define your character. Now, you can't just be a human warrior from the free marches. No, you have to be a human noble, with a family even! How can you play a recluse female human rogue if you're hanging out with your brother and parents? The origins will limit roleplay to an incredible degree.

Plus, we don't have a queqe, our charaters can't die (what is this "injury" BS) and we have regenerating health and mana instead of Vancian magic which will just destroy strategy. Even worse, we can't kill any character we like, as we could in BG!

Really, DA is dumbed down and commercialized, and is barely an RPG. Bioware should be ashamed to call it the spirtual succesor of BG2.

So I find it very ironic how 1) now DA is this amazingly rich RPG that has all the features an RPG should have instead of some absurd failure because of the lack of features above and 2) DA2 means Biowares sold out the legacy of BG.

[Marionetten]

The biggest issue with Dragon Age: Origins is indeed how easy it is. The regenerating heath combined with the poor encounter design makes for an unchallenging game. Even on Nightmare. The critics were right about this.

Even so, it was a rare throwback and I believe it was appreciated for being just that.

Modifié par Marionetten, 26 juillet 2010 - 05:28 .

[AlanC9]

Marionetten wrote...

I'm talking about the forums outside of this one. We're not an accurate representation of the majority as most of us are hardcore fans. Look to something like www.gametrailers.com for a far better selection.

Can't stand those sites. I'll take your word for it.

[In Exile]

Marionetten wrote...
The biggest issue with Dragon Age: Origins is how easy it is. The regenerating heath combined with the poor encounter design makes for an unchallenging game with no real consequences. Even on Nightmare. The critics were right about this.

Even so, it was a rare throwback and I believe it was appreciated for being just that.

Except if you actually followed the game, it wasn't a throwback at all. It was Bioware selling out and betraying their core fanbase from BG II. The game was clearly going to fail commercially, because they removed all of the things that made BG II great and introduced features that dumbed down the game for consoles, like the inventory, the origins, the MMO like combat, etc.

Seriously, the features are different, but people were saying the same things about DA that they're saying about DA2 now.

[AlanC9]

Marionetten wrote...

The biggest issue with Dragon Age: Origins is indeed how easy it is. The regenerating heath combined with the poor encounter design makes for an unchallenging game. Even on Nightmare. The critics were right about this.

DA's easy, but regenerating health isn't the issue. You could regenerate health anytime in the IE games. The worst thing that could happen is you'd earn some extra XP from a random encounter

Modifié par AlanC9, 26 juillet 2010 - 05:32 .

[Marionetten]

In Exile wrote...

Except if you actually followed the game, it wasn't a throwback at all. It was Bioware selling out and betraying their core fanbase from BG II. The game was clearly going to fail commercially, because they removed all of the things that made BG II great and introduced features that dumbed down the game for consoles, like the inventory, the origins, the MMO like combat, etc.

I did follow the game and you're exaggerating quite a bit here. Most likely intentionally in order to make a point.

While there was a lot of criticism it was nowhere near the level of the criticism we've seen here. I do remember the endless debates concerning portraits, regenerating health and horses. I do find myself longing for those debates instead of what we're seeing here as most of it was just nitpicking. This isn't. This is about a game completely changing its direction and attempting to appeal to a completely different audience. Dragon Age: Origins was a loveletter to the Baldur's Gate audience. Sure, it might have been poorly written but the effort was there. Dragon Age 2 is everything but.

In Exile wrote...

Seriously, the features are different, but people were saying the same things about DA that they're saying about DA2 now.

If Dragon Age: Origins gutted the combat system Dragon Age 2 is gutting the rest.

Modifié par Marionetten, 26 juillet 2010 - 05:40 .

[Saibh]

In Exile wrote...

McHoger wrote...

Seems to me the majority of PC Gamers derided it for not being Baldur's Gate 3.

I remember on the old forums, the major criticisms of DA:O were how the combat had been dumbed down because know we weren't told the statistics in the description for the spells (how can I know how to build my character unless you tell me fireball does 9d6 damage!), the inventory system, now relying on a scroll down menu with tabs instead of the boxes of NWN and BG was also dumbed down (and we have the option to carry how many items, 80!? absurd!) especially since there was a shared character inventory versus an individual inventory.

Let's not even speak about what a disaster the origin stories will be for roleplay, because of how much they define your character. Now, you can't just be a human warrior from the free marches. No, you have to be a human noble, with a family even! How can you play a recluse female human rogue if you're hanging out with your brother and parents? The origins will limit roleplay to an incredible degree.

Plus, we don't have a queqe, our charaters can't die (what is this "injury" BS) and we have regenerating health and mana instead of Vancian magic which will just destroy strategy. Even worse, we can't kill any character we like, as we could in BG!

Really, DA is dumbed down and commercialized, and is barely an RPG. Bioware should be ashamed to call it the spirtual succesor of BG2.

So I find it very ironic how 1) now DA is this amazingly rich RPG that has all the features an RPG should have instead of some absurd failure because of the lack of features above and 2) DA2 means Biowares sold out the legacy of BG.

People always complain. There are always dissenters. I'm sure it hurts to be on the side of the complainers once the game comes out, and find out that most people ended up liking it and you are a small voice in the crowd.

Personally, I take it all with a grain of salt. It's not like this is the first time people have been angry, it definitely won't be the last, and I'll just sit back and enjoy.

[Maverick827]

Kordaris wrote...

Marionetten wrote...
Dragon Age: Origins was a loveletter to the Baldur's Gate audience. Sure, it might have been poorly written but the effort was there. Dragon Age 2 is everything but.

This is a loveletter as well-to console clickers, Diablo 3 players, God of War fans. We will see if they will be attached to an uglier version of their loved ones.

I do not like Diablo nor God of War, but I anticipate DA2.

Your argument!  It has been shattered!

[javierabegazo]

http://social.biowar...1/index/3099230